Shooters to sue over gun ban

The firearms lobby will today launch legal action against the Government, claiming compensation, which could run into hundreds of millions of pounds, for the ban on the ownership of handguns.

Although the group is not challenging the legality of the ban, it is asking the European Commission on Human Rights to judge whether the compensation package offered by the Government is adequate.

A legal team, representing all sectors of the firearms industry, will lodge the application today, claiming compensation for loss of business and amenities.

The move does not attempt to challenge the Firearms Act, which was enacted after the Dunblane school massacre in March last year, when 16 children and their teacher were killed. However, the group has described the Government's compensation package, passed by Parliament in June this year, as "woefully inadequate and lacking in consistency".

Six applications will be lodged by The Firearms Industry Compensation Group, and will come from an unnamed individual shooter, two wholesalers, two gun clubs and a manufacturer.

Michael Whitton, of Edwin Coe, the firm of solicitors acting for the group, said that if the action was successful, it would clear the way for "hundreds, possibly thousands" of compensation claims.

Although the prohibition itself was not being challenged, a fair balance must be struck between the public interest in a ban and the protection of the fundamental rights of individuals and businesses, he said. There were no domestic remedies available, he added.

"If the Government chooses to deprive an entire industry of its property - namely its ability to trade and the fruits of that trade - and individuals of the right to enjoy a leisure activity, it should provide proper compensation. In respect of economic interests and loss of amenity, it has provided absolutely nothing," said Mr Whitton.

He said the Commission was expected to take about 18 months to consider the claims. Its options included rejecting the applications or passing them to the European Court of Human Rights, which would take up to five years to hear the case.

The claims are based on Article 1 of the First Protocol of the European Convention of Human Rights. The lobby claims the compensation scheme devised by the Government did not take into account the loss of business, assets, trading income, other economic interests or the loss of amenities for individual shooters.

The gun lobby has claimed that the 1997 amendments to the Firearms Act will not have an effect on gun-related crime.

It has pointed to the example of murderers and robbers who were rarely registered with gun clubs, claiming that sportsmen would suffer because of the legislation.

A pounds 150m compensation package for gun owners was approved by Parliament in June ahead of the ban on larger calibre handguns which came into force on 1 July. The Government said at the time that claims could be processed within 18 months from 1 July.

Last night, a Home Office spokesman said that in the light of the Dunblane tragedy it was clear that only the strictest firearms laws could provide proper public safety.

"The Government has an overwhelming mandate for gun control. The compensation package for gun owners was approved by Parliament on 9 June, 1997, and obviously it entails a careful balancing act in paying compensation to those affected and controlling public expenditure," he said.

A leading anti-gun campaigner, Ann Pearston, last night said that if the case succeeded it would amount to the writing of a blank cheque from taxpayers. Companies were not normally compensated for the commercial impact of legislative changes and they should not be in this case, she said.

"When the health and safety regulations are changed, there are costs to businesses and the Government isn't obliged to compensate, because it is about public safety. This is about public safety. They are being compensated for their assets, but to compensate them for this would write an open cheque. Why should they set such a precedent?" she asked.

The Tory Government had tried to introduce less stringent legislation, but it ran into trouble because of a rebellion by its own pro-gun MPs. When Labour came to power it promised, and passed, a total ban.